Attention!!! Pro Sports Daily will be down on Wednesday morning from 5:00am - 7:00am eastern time for database maintenance. All Sports Direct Inc. properties will be down during this scheduled outage.
Sorry for any inconvenience that this outage may cause.

If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

True, but I'm not saying the exact trade involving the Bobcats.... I'm saying, what if Dumars decided to keep Gordon and find a team to dump Stuckey on?

Was getting rid of Gordon really worth giving up a future 1st? The way the team has been playing right now, it seems like we need all the assets we can get. I know things can change quick, but if the past 3yrs have been the same why wouldn't the next 3 be any different?

I'm not sure having a pick is an "asset" for us. Yes, it'd be nice to have, but we're all clamoring for Drummond to play. We basically would have Knight, Monroe, Drummond and throw in Singler (at least for now) and we would be very young. Too young in my opinion.

Let's say you can parlay the pick for a veteran. At that point a team willing to trade him is probably paying him too much. And if we had the pick and playing alot of youngsters, it would be hard to sign that "grizzled" vet for leadership. That player is going to want to come in and play also and he probably isn't going to sign a long term contact because he can see the writing on the wall (regarding the youngsters playing more and more).

I can't believe some of these posts. First of, Gordon does suck at defense but don't act like stuckey is light years better. He is just as inconsistent on defense as he is on offense. But one thing that Gordon has that stuckey doesn't, is the clutch gene.

Say what you want about Gordon, but even receiving inconsistent min, he always shot a really good %. Stuckey can't even shoot consistently when he gets consistent min, imagine how he would look if he was in Gordons place.

And the significant min that Gordon did receive, look at his numbers. I remember him getting a 45pt game against Denver when he was the main focus, when has stuckey ever done that .... lemme guess, you idiots will bring up that one time 5 years ago against a rookie
What has he done now?

His average FG% in 3 years was 43.3%. Hardly what I would call "a really good %."

Granted, his long 2's and 3's do affect that somewhat, but either way, not "a really good %."

Second, his assists to T/O was 1:1. Everytime he sets someone else up, the next play he's dribbling it off it foot.

No, I think trading Gordon was a good idea, just wish we didn't have to add a 1st rd pick. Although, with our recent influx of young players on the team, it isn't as bad as it seems.
We have Moose/Knight/Singler/English/Middleton/Drummond/Slava all under 25 yrs old. So far I would bet that Moose(already is), Knight, Singler, Drummond will become really good players. So it isn't quite as important to have another young player from the 1st rd.

We now have cap space next summer to fill needs and give the appropriate extensions. Now, if we were to trade Stuckey, say for Tyreke Evans. We would have a better scoring guard, wouldn't cost much more than what we are paying Stuckey. We would still probably have our draft pick next draft, 20+ mil$ to spend in FA.

His average FG% in 3 years was 43.3%. Hardly what I would call "a really good %."

Granted, his long 2's and 3's do affect that somewhat, but either way, not "a really good %."

Second, his assists to T/O was 1:1. Everytime he sets someone else up, the next play he's dribbling it off it foot.

Every year that Gordon was in the league he shot over 40% from 3. Explain how all of a sudden he shot 32% from 3 the first year he was w/ the pistons? Stuckey was the point guard, he was suppose to make players better. He didn't do his jobGordon shot consistently, check his last 2 years in det. And this is w/ no legit point guard setting him up or getting consistent min

Why the F are you talking about his assists? Gordon isn't a point guard. Who had the ball in their hands most of the time? Was it not stuckey? Go check Bryants, assist to TO ratio. Go check carmelo's.
I mean really?

Every year that Gordon was in the league he shot over 40% from 3. Explain how all of a sudden he shot 32% from 3 the first year he was w/ the pistons? Stuckey was the point guard, he was suppose to make players better. He didn't do his jobGordon shot consistently, check his last 2 years in det. And this is w/ no legit point guard setting him up or getting consistent min

Why the F are you talking about his assists? Gordon isn't a point guard. Who had the ball in their hands most of the time? Was it not stuckey? Go check Bryants, assist to TO ratio. Go check carmelo's.
I mean really?

OK. . .

But I think we need to look at what we are defining SG: shooting guard or scoring guard? I think there is a difference.

As for Kobe/Carmello:

Kobe/Melo have the ball in their hands a crap load more than BG.

Kobe's career stats: Assists 4.7 T/O 2.96 1.6:1

Melo A 3.1 T/O 2.99 yes, a 1:1 ratio.

BG A 2.8 T/O 2.25 1.24 : 1

Career Mins Ave:
BG 29.8
Kobe 36.5
Melo 36

Extrapolate BG to 36 mins: A 3.47 T/O 2.79

So he'd still be behind Kobe (no disgrace there) and running about even with Melo . . .and this is for a guy, who as you insinuate above, doesn't have the ball in his hands. Which is kindly saying if he had the ball more, those stats would be even worse.

"Explain how all of a sudden he shot 32% from 3 the first year he was w/ the pistons? " True, but the next two years he shot above 40%, the last time I looked, Stuck was still the PG during that time. So 2 of 3 years he shoots over 40% with Stuck as his PG, but the year he doesn't it's Stuck's fault. got it.

But I think we need to look at what we are defining SG: shooting guard or scoring guard? I think there is a difference.

As for Kobe/Carmello:

Kobe/Melo have the ball in their hands a crap load more than BG.

Kobe's career stats: Assists 4.7 T/O 2.96 1.6:1

Melo A 3.1 T/O 2.99 yes, a 1:1 ratio.

BG A 2.8 T/O 2.25 1.24 : 1

Career Mins Ave:
BG 29.8
Kobe 36.5
Melo 36

Extrapolate BG to 36 mins: A 3.47 T/O 2.79

So he'd still be behind Kobe (no disgrace there) and running about even with Melo . . .and this is for a guy, who as you insinuate above, doesn't have the ball in his hands. Which is kindly saying if he had the ball more, those stats would be even worse.

"Explain how all of a sudden he shot 32% from 3 the first year he was w/ the pistons? " True, but the next two years he shot above 40%, the last time I looked, Stuck was still the PG during that time. So 2 of 3 years he shoots over 40% with Stuck as his PG, but the year he doesn't it's Stuck's fault. got it.

No I'm not saying that, what Im saying is how do you know how he would do if it hasn't happened!

No don't be "extrapolating" BG's numbers, that's like using ESPN projecting a teams record at the end of the season after they start of the season 8-2.

Ya, stuckey had absolutely nothing to do w/ BG only year where he shot 32% instead of his usual 40% + stat line. We won't blame the point guard for that one year, cause thats what we do here, never put the blame on stuckey, gotcha.

If anything, him even shooting a good % w/ his incosistent min and playing on such a horribly constructed team w/ every player playing out of position, it credits how good BG is. We just think he sucks cause of his size and his lack of defense, but don't sit up their and act like stuckey is light years better then him when he's not.

And btw Butter, Look at everyones stats in the last year we had Chauncy and then check everyones stats right after we had stuckey running the show. Look how they significantly decreased, thus resulting to us being a good team to all of a sudden sucking out of no where. And these are the EXACT same players that played w/ chaucny and won a championship, so wasn't like stuckey played w/ scrubs.

He played w/ proven winners and made them look like d-league players

So I guess I was right about putting the blame on stuckey for that topic

No I'm not saying that, what Im saying is how do you know how he would do if it hasn't happened!

No don't be "extrapolating" BG's numbers, that's like using ESPN projecting a teams record at the end of the season after they start of the season 8-2.

Ya, stuckey had absolutely nothing to do w/ BG only year where he shot 32% instead of his usual 40% + stat line. We won't blame the point guard for that one year, cause thats what we do here, never put the blame on stuckey, gotcha.

If anything, him even shooting a good % w/ his incosistent min and playing on such a horribly constructed team w/ every player playing out of position, it credits how good BG is. We just think he sucks cause of his size and his lack of defense, but don't sit up their and act like stuckey is light years better then him when he's not.

No don't be "extrapolating" BG's numbers, that's like using ESPN projecting a teams record at the end of the season after they start of the season 8-2.

Uh, you're absolutely wrong. I've extrapolated ~7 years of BG's stats to compare 15 years and 8 years of Kobe/melo. It's not 8-2 (~12% of the season) analogy in any way, shape or form. That's a sloppy and ignorant point.

With respect to Chauncey, yes, we were worse record wise with Stuck. I think Micheal Curry and John kuester have something to do with that. . . or it explains Flip Saunders more. . . I think the worse record also reflects AI.

Ya, stuckey had absolutely nothing to do w/ BG only year where he shot 32% instead of his usual 40% + stat line. We won't blame the point guard for that one year, cause thats what we do here, never put the blame on stuckey, gotcha.

You were the one who said it was Stuck's fault he shot 30%, I wasn't the one blaming him. I just merely pointed out that if we're going to blame him for the 30%, then we need to recognize that the other two years when BG shot ~40% what happened? Stuck was still our PG.

And btw Butter, Look at everyones stats in the last year we had Chauncy and then check everyones stats right after we had stuckey running the show. Look how they significantly decreased, thus resulting to us being a good team to all of a sudden sucking out of no where. And these are the EXACT same players that played w/ chaucny and won a championship, so wasn't like stuckey played w/ scrubs. He played w/ proven winners and made them look like d-league players

So I guess I was right about putting the blame on stuckey for that topic

Well, we were missing Okur, Coliss Williamson and a couple of others. They were 2004 vs. 2009, 5 years older, so they weren't exactly the same type of players. And you won't convince me sheed had something more to play for in 2005-2009 vs. 2004 ( a contract year).

You're doing the same thing as you said I did: Extrapolating, saying we should be as good in 2009 vs. 2004 because we had the same players (which we didn't). Using that analogy to it's logical end, Magic, Kareem & Worthy should still be killing it.

Yes, I agree we sucked. But I also think it had alot to do with AI and the coach and the attitudes of several players.

The same guys and CB (as you would say) and we improve/didn't improve, regressed and didn't make the finals again after 2005 . . .. With the same players. So we would pin that on CB? . . of course not.

Uh, you're absolutely wrong. I've extrapolated ~7 years of BG's stats to compare 15 years and 8 years of Kobe/melo. It's not 8-2 analogy in any way, shape or form. That's a sloppy and ignorant point.

With respect to Chauncey, yes, we were worse record wise with Stuck. I think Micheal Curry and John kuester have something to do with that. . . or it explains Flip Saunders more. . . I think the worse record also reflects AI.

You were the one who said it was Stuck's fault he shot 30%, I wasn't the one blaming him. I just merely pointed out that if we're going to blame him for the 30%, then we need to recognize that the other two years when BG shot ~40% what happened? Stuck was still our PG.

Wow, did you not extrapolate BG's per 36 min? Was that not the sentence I bolded and commented on? You said IF Gordon played 36 min then he would get these numbers. Thats exactly what you said. My point was how do you know he would get those numbers if it hasn't happened? Then I used the example of the projected records.

Dude I said Check the record right after Chauncy left, Flip Saunders was still our coach. Don't bring up Curry or Kuester into your argument to make your crap look good.

And more excuses for stuckey, my goodness. Didn't A.I. leave? that very year did he not take that leave of absence and never showed up at the mid point of the season? We had the same team that made it to the eastern conf finals for countless years. The only thing that got changed was replacing Chaucny w/ stuckey at point. Did you see how we looked in the playoffs that year? We were nothing like how we looked from years past.

And I already told you, it credits BGs game if he can still shoot a consistent % in those 2 years w/ that messed up team
You answer my question, how did Sheed, Prince, Hamilton and Mcdys (proven winners) all shoot a horrible % right after Stuckey became our point guard?

Originally Posted by markbutter

Well, we were missing Okur, Coliss Williamson and a couple of others. They were 2004 vs. 2009, 5 years older, so they weren't exactly the same type of players.

you're doing the same thing as you said I did: Extrapolating, saying we should be as good in 2009 vs. 2004 because we had the same players. Using that, Magic, Kareem & Worthy should still be killing it.

Yes, I agree we sucked. But I also think it had alot to do with AI and the coach and the attitudes of several players.

The same guys and CB (as you would say) and we didn't improve, regressed and didn't make the finals. so let's not roll the dice and be happy about making the ECF finals every year?

Wtf are you talking about? I said check the stats of the players the year right before Chuancy left and the year right after stuckey took over. Why the *** are you talking about 2009 and Okur and Williamson. They weren't on the team in chauncys last year. Stop!
It was ONE **** year. They went from being top 10 in assist to 2nd to last w/ stuckey, they went from being in the otp of the league to sucking w/ stuckey. They went from being a lethal team in the playoffs to looking like the bobcats. Oh but no, its not stuckey.

And don't talk about curry or kuester cause Flip was still our coach!!! And A.I. left at the mid point of the season.

And it had nothing to do w/ players attitudes, cause we still suck w/ stuckey even w/ new players. 0-8? really? 1-0 w/o him?
Stop!

The same guys and CB (as you would say) and we improve/didn't improve, regressed and didn't make the finals again after 2005 . . .. With the same players. So we would pin that on CB? . . of course not.

Are you serious? Who cares if we didn't make the finals, we made it to the conf finals every year right? I can't even believe im commenting on this

Look at our record and then look at it right after stuckey became our point guard. I love how you conveniently stop at year 2009

Wow, did you not extrapolate BG's per 36 min? Was that not the sentence I bolded and commented on? You said IF Gordon played 36 min then he would get these numbers. Thats exactly what you said. My point was how do you know he would get those numbers if it hasn't happened? Then I used the example of the projected records.

Dude I said Check the record right after Chauncy left, Flip Saunders was still our coach. Don't bring up Curry or Kuester into your argument to make your crap look good.

And more excuses for stuckey, my goodness. Didn't A.I. leave? that very year did he not take that leave of absence and never showed up at the mid point of the season? We had the same team that made it to the eastern conf finals for countless years. The only thing that got changed was replacing Chaucny w/ stuckey at point. Did you see how we looked in the playoffs that year? We were nothing like how we looked from years past.

And I already told you, it credits BGs game if he can still shoot a consistent % in those 2 years w/ that messed up team
You answer my question, how did Sheed, Prince, Hamilton and Mcdys (proven winners) all shoot a horrible % right after Stuckey became our point guard?

Wtf are you talking about? I said check the stats of the players the year right before Chuancy left and the year right after stuckey took over. Why the *** are you talking about 2009 and Okur and Williamson. They weren't on the team in chauncys last year. Stop!
It was ONE **** year. They went from being top 10 in assist to 2nd to last w/ stuckey, they went from being in the otp of the league to sucking w/ stuckey. They went from being a lethal team in the playoffs to looking like the bobcats. Oh but no, its not stuckey.

And don't talk about curry or kuester cause Flip was still our coach!!! And A.I. left at the mid point of the season.

And it had nothing to do w/ players attitudes, cause we still suck w/ stuckey even w/ new players. 0-8? really? 1-0 w/o him?
Stop!

Extrapolating only works with a good sample size. Using BG's 7 years, 4 with the bulls and 3 with us is a good extrapolation. IT IS NOT the same as using 8-2, which represents only 12% of a season to extrapolate the entire season.

We did suck following the trade. Yes, AI did leave the team, but I believe that was in march, just before the playoffs. Not that it would have made a difference had he played in the playoffs.

So it credits BG when he can shoot 40% for two years in spite of Stuck at point, but the year he didn't, it's Stucks fault. Well, if he is to be given such great credit for the two good years, why can't we hold him to the same standard and say he didn't get it done the year he didn't shoot 40%? He deserves the credit when he's got it going, but someone else is to blame when he doesn't? Got it.

And holding to your standard: CB good year, following year Stuck - we suck. OK, I agree. But:

do we pin the lack of finals on CB from one year to the next?
Or the lack of a chip from one year to the next?

Using your standard from one year to the next:

2004 vs. 2005 finals - no chip - basically the same players.

2005 vs. 2006 no finals - basically the same players

2006 vs. 2007 no finals - basically the same players

2007 vs. 2008 no finals - bascially the same players.

Yes, we sucked in 2009. I'm not denying that. But I don't think it can all be blamed on Stuck but he does share some of the blame. But everybody does. Look at the trend the last 3 years of CB. If you were a betting man, would you put money on the chip in spring 2009 given the previous 3 years of CB's reign? Are the odds greater than they would be with Stuck? Yes.

Are the odds greater from one year to the next with CB? 5 consecutive years, going from year to year, with basically the same starting 5 and CB as our PG suggest otherwise.